TMSJ 17/1 (Fall 2006) 177-190 EMERGENT SOTERIOLOGY: THE DARK SIDE Trevor P. Craigen Associate Professor of Theology Brian MacLaren typifies the dissatisfaction of the emergent over the format and praxis of modern churches. Such reactions ignore Psalm 1 in setting forth the source and impact of a proper worldview, a definitive conclusion about a proper worldview, and a formal approved conclusion as to a proper worldview. Though Emergent churches might identify themselves as evangelical, they still register dissatisfaction with the existing evangelical church, a dissatisfaction that spills over and affects emergent’s doctrine of salvation. The language of Emergent churches ignores a number of traditional soteriological terms and redefines others. Emergent soteriology replaces biblical emphasis on a person’s eternal destiny with emphasis on one’s future condition and status in the present life, ignoring the impact of present behavior on future destiny. Because of selling short the words of Scripture, Emergent perspectives also are woefully errant in understanding the work of Christ on the cross. Emergents have revised the meaning of the well-known acrostic TULIP, depriving it of meanings given it in the Bible. They have an inclusivist view of the eternal destiny of the unsaved, leaning toward the position of universalism. Rather than following the worldview of Psalm 1, the movement has fallen into a pattern resulting from present-world philosophy. * * * * * Timothy, the apostle Paul’s young protégée, was to exercise discriminating judgment in order to know which were the strange doctrines to put down. His and Titus’ shepherding task was to exhort to sound doctrine or healthy words and to refute those who contradicted such teaching (Titus 1:9). The immediate context emphasizes the necessity of this task undertaken by the elders. Many “must be silenced” or “whose mouths must be stopped” because their efforts were disturbing whole families, and doctrinal harmony was absent. The teacher, the refuter, the elder, is to hold fast the faithful word in accordance with the teaching he had received; otherwise he has no foundation by which to evaluate and judge the soundness of what he is hearing. That is hardly a gentle dialogue and friendly chat as though an equitable philosophical level prevails for all parties. Refuting those who are wrong is more than conversation or an enjoyable dialogue. Dialogue without the goal of placing the truth squarely on the table between the debaters accomplishes very little, for the one party retains an aberrant understanding. The elder’s task is to refute those who contradict and not to try and learn something from them. His actions and speech should reveal his taking into account the charge from 177 178 The Master’s Seminary Journal the apostle to be kind and gentle and gracious in opposing error. Still, error has nothing to offer truth! Brian McLaren, the influential writer and an initiator of the Emergent, affirms that sound doctrine is very important and adds that bad doctrine, though not the root of all evil, is a despicable accomplice to a good bit of evil in the world. Then he asks if there is any value in emphasizing doctrinal distinctives. In a note sounding like a contradiction, he observes that doctrinal distinctives are hazardous to spiritual health.1 The Emergent is basically a reaction of dissatisfaction with the modern churches, their format, and praxis. Reactions range from the mildly critical to a far more discontented hostility. Some of this comes from those who have had years of ministry behind them, but for some reason have evaluated the church and their ministries negatively. Exploring the reasons for that will have to be the subject of another essay. When it comes down to life and death issues and religious ideals, man needs something objective coming from outside himself, since depending on his own heart and mind will prove to be most unreliable and definitely not immutable. Humans are remarkably creative and eclectic in composing worldviews, with or without the Bible, which answer the question, “How then should one live?” Such worldviews treat also the riddle of existence, the problem of evil, origins and endpoints, the state of the world, and religious ideology. The preface to the Psalter, namely Psalm 1, presents a meaningful worldview.2 The three conclusions in this preface are (1) a lengthy, didactic conclusion which presents the source and impact of a meaningful worldview—vv.1- 3, (2) a terse and definitive conclusion which rejects all other options—v. 4, and (3) the formal ‘approved’ conclusion which demands that eternity be in one’s worldview—vv.5-6. The vocabulary leaves the reader with the distinct realization of what is the right source and what is the wrong source for his philosophy of life, or better, his theology. The blessed man does not follow the different system of worldly teaching and standards put forward by opponents of the LORD God. The ungodly, the sinner, and the scornful have nothing of value to offer. Instead, God has provided His Word for the believer to live by. The verbs, “walk, stand, and sit,” in this context, together with the nouns, “counsel, path, seat,” are clearly metaphors of pedagogy.3 The dark side represents those statements and conclusions which are not of sound doctrine. This essay intends only to highlight a selected number of statements from the many which caused a quizzical furrowing of the brow, if not also a shake of the head. Preliminary Acknowledgements Those organizations and churches whose official statements of faith, or at least statements about the faith, would fit well within the parameters of 1Brian McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2004) 195. 2The obvious breaks in the psalm are the dividing points: the emphasis of the phrase “not so,” is shown by a repeat of that phrase to read as “not so the wicked not so!” [lo’ kn] in v. 4 and the “wherefore” [‘al kn] in v. 5, thus giving rise to three sections/conclusions. 3“Walk” is a well-known metaphor of a course taken in life, “stand” could describe one standing in a stream of thought, and “sit” being perhaps a valid metaphor for listening to lectures. Emergent Soteriology: The Dark Side 179 evangelicalism should be noted. One organization, Acts 29 Network, for example, in its short answer to a question on its beliefs and core values, introduced itself as being [1] Christian, [2] evangelical, [3] missional, and [4] Reformed. It declared itself to be in full agreement with the doctrinal statement of the National Association of Evangelicals. In spelling out its Reformed position, the depravity of man and the initiative of God in salvation are clearly presented. In its own words, “We believe that the salvation of the elect was accomplished by the sinless life, substitutionary atoning death and literal physical resurrection of Jesus Christ in place of His people for their sins.” Having spelled out the five parts of the acrostic, Acts 29 added about eighteen “we are not ________” propositional statements for further clarification of its doctrinal position. A sampling suffices: C “We are not liberals who embrace culture without discernment and compromise the distinctives of the gospel, but rather Christians who believe the truths of the Bible are eternal and therefore fitting for every time, place, and people.” C “We are not moralists seeking to help people live good lives, but instead evangelists laboring that people would become new creations in Christ.” C “We are not relativists and do gladly embrace Scripture as our highest authority above such things as culture, experience, philosophy, and other forms of revelation.” C “We are not naturalists and do believe that Satan and demons are real enemies at work in this world.” C “We are not universalists and do believe that many will spend eternity in the torments of hell, as the Bible teaches.” Authors who are respected are listed at the end of a document distinguishing Acts 29 Network from similar groups. Augustine, Calvin, Luther, the Puritans, Spurgeon, and Edwards are names from the past. Then names from the contemporary scene such as Grudem and Piper appear, but the list also includes Leslie Newbigin, missionary to India turned pluralist. The reader is hard-pressed to explain why this group, Acts 29 Network, considers itself doctrinally to be Emergent—it just does not seem to fit that label. This was an encouraging note in the midst of other literature on the phenomenon of the Emerging Church, or on postmodern theologies and influences on the church.4 Undoubtedly, statements of faith highly congruent with orthodox evangelicalism could very well be gracing the official documents of churches identifying themselves as part of the Emergent “conversation” or movement,5 for one reason or another, including some degree of disenchantment with existing churches and their practice. The hallmark of those who write from within the Emergent circles appears to be a dissatisfaction with the existing evangelical church. Either it arose from 4The information given above was found at http://www.acts29network.org/main.html, accessed 11/14/2005, under “plant a church” and also under “FAQ.” 5Eddie Gibbs and Ryan K. Bolger, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005) 29; Gibbs and Bolger refer to it as a disparate movement, noting that it is very diverse and fragmented and that to insiders the term ‘conversation’ is preferable. 180 The Master’s Seminary Journal wrestling with a doctrine which was not palatable as traditionally taught, or more likely, it arose from the church’s lack of serious engagement in social, political, and wider cultural issues of the day.6 Disillusionment set in.7 Were a sermonic-like proposition to be crafted for this essay, it perhaps would be this: A fourfold redrafting8 of biblical teaching and doctrine is quickly discernible; a redrafting not done because in-depth exegesis has brought to the fore the need for a careful restatement which would act both as a purgative and a preservative, a purgative in that an accurate statement of doctrine would purge out false teaching and a preservative in that sound doctrine would be protected from corruption.